EVACUEE TRUST PROPERTY BOARD, LAHORE vs RIAZ AHMAD And Another
This petition for leave to appeal arises from a judgment of the Federal Service Tribunal, which set aside the dismissal of the respondent ordered by the Evacuee Trust Property Board under the Corporation Employees (Special Powers) Ordinance, 1978. The Tribunal interfered with the dismissal on the basis that the Board failed to produce evidence proving the respondent's appointment was made on political considerations. The petitioner challenges this decision, arguing that the Tribunal erred by importing jurisdictional limitations not present in the governing statute. The core legal question is whether the Tribunal exceeded its jurisdiction by interpreting the law to require evidence of political motivation when the statute itself did not provide for such a ground for action. The Supreme Court granted leave to appeal, noting that this issue of statutory interpretation is a matter of public importance, particularly given its relevance to similar cases under section 12-A of the Civil Servants Act, 1973. The Court ordered the appeal to be heard alongside other matters raising similar questions of law.
- Does the Federal Service Tribunal exceed its jurisdiction by requiring evidence of political considerations for a dismissal under the Corporation Employees (Special Powers) Ordinance, 1978, when the statute does not explicitly provide for such a ground?
- Is the interpretation of statutory grounds for dismissal under the Corporation Employees (Special Powers) Ordinance, 1978, a question of public importance justifying leave to appeal under Article 212(3) of the Constitution?
- Article 212(3), Constitution of Pakistan 1973
- Section 3, Corporation Employees (Special Powers) Ordinance 1978
- Section 12-A, Civil Servants Act 1973
ORDER
1. SHAFIUR RAHMAN, J.--The petitioner seeks leave to appeal under Article 212(3) of the Constitution against the judgment of Federal Service Tribunal, dated 29-5-1984 whereby the dismissal of respondent under section 3 of the Corporation Employees (Special Powers) Ordinance, 1978, was set aside.
2. The Tribunal has interfered with the order of the dismissal on the ground that no evidence has been produced by the respondent from which it could discover that the appellant had been appointed on political consideration.
3. The law under which the dismissal had been ordered provided on such ground for taking action nor the action was sustainable by reference to such ground. By importing such jurisdictional limitation whether the Tribunal has not exceeded its jurisdiction in interpreting and applying a law is a question of public importance arising in a number of cases particularly under section 12-A of the Civil Servants Act. Leave to appeal is, therefore, granted and this shall be subject to all just exceptions with regard to limitation. The learned counsel has explained the delay by pointing out that the order was not announced but was communicated and the date of communication and its receipt make the petition within the.
4. Let this appeal be heard alongwith other appeals raising similar question.
5. M.I.